EB Online EDU v2.0 - RELEASE!

[gamegeek2]

Greetings, denizens of the Campus Martius....


Today I am very proud to present you with

The Unofficial EB Online export_descr_unit File, version 2.0.

Introduction

The whole concept of a heavily altered online EDU came up in a conversation between Vartan and I when we were discussing what might come up in the online tournament. Several definite conclusions were reached between us about what ought to be changed. I then proposed that I make a new EDU for the upcoming summer of EB Online, as a way of correcting perceived imbalances and injecting a shot of vitality into the whole EB Online metagame.

The original goals of the alterations were fairly simple - to make phalanxes more vulnerable to missile attack, to increase the effectiveness of shortswords, and to depower certain units such as Thraikioi Peltastai. However, the goals became very quickly much more far-reaching, with hundreds of documented changes, from small tweaks to major restattings of certain units.

At its core, this project seeks to further the EB team's goal with the original unit stats - to create a balanced battle system through historical accuracy.

For the full list of instructions for EB Online, be sure to visit http://www.ebonline.tk/getting-started.html (http://www.ebonline.tk/instructions.html)


A Short List of Major Changes

Obviously this EDU changes a lot, but here, I have listed a short list of changes that I feel will be the most impactful on EB Online gameplay, with explanations.

-Lethality of all kopides & falcatae increased from 0.11 to 0.135, and lethality of all axes & maces decreased from 0.165 to 0.15
Reasoning: The original EB stat system made falcatae/kopides more expensive than axes/maces and gave them a lethaltiy of 0.11; axes and maces were cheaper and had 1 less attack but a lethality of 0.165. Given what we know of (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=377804) RTW battle mechanics (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=111344) this means that falcatae and kopides were more expensive but less effective versions of axes and maces. This did not make sense because historically, falcatae and kopides were highly effective weapons, and it was also imbalanced from a gameplay perspective. The new stat setup is designed so that the two weapons are of roughly equal effectiveness.

-Prodromoi armour decreased to 9 and cost decreased to 2210. Carthaginian Citizen Cavalry defense skill reduced to 8.
Reasoning: The EB depiction of prodromoi features heavy armour including facemasks and scale-reinforced linothorax cuirasses. Historically, such xyston-wielding light horsemen rarely had anything more than a linothorax and helmet, but we have decided to stat them so they are on par with the Carthaginian citizen cavalry, which had a defense skill decrease. Previously, Prodromoi were often used as a "filler" cavalry unit, that were relatively cheap but still fairly resistant to missiles for their cost and able to drive home a charge well. Now, their cost has been reduced, but their durability against missiles and their ability to avoid casualties during a charge have both been reduced, which (I believe) outweighs the cost reduction. This is part of an overall effort to reduce the importance of lance-armed cavalry in EB Online battles, as lance-armed horsemen were historically not the majority of cavalry as they typically are in EB Online battles.

-Shortsword lethality increased to a minimum of 0.13, and made 0.15 for units that have been deemed "trained in its use"
Reasoning: Before this change, many shortsword-wielding troops had only 0.1 lethality, which made them useless, when historically they played valuable army roles. For example, Galatian shortswordsmen were historically an important part of Galatian armies, and effective melee fighters for their cost, but this was not the case with the previous stat system. Also, there was very little reason to use shortswords instead of spears for units like Iphikratous Hoplitai, even though such units were historically trained in their use.

-Cavalry charge bonuses redone on a new system
Reasoning: The old system failed to give cavalry an increased charge power based on training, only based on horse and weapon type. The new system takes into account training, horse, and weapon type. In particular, it increased the charge effectiveness of overhand spear wielding cavalry, though this is also due to an increase in overhand spear cavalry lethality.

-Pre-Marian Roman heavy infantry cost reduction reduced to -10%
Reasoning: Previously, pre-Marian romans were only allowed to use 91.7% of the money available to other factions in "official" games - 33,000 mnai in a 36,000 mnai game, for example - because of how cheap their units were. The need for rules to restrict the money available to some factions at a certain era indicates, to I and some others, a problem in unit balance. There is also historical reasoning behind this: Pre-Marian Romans were only able to draw on Roman citizens for Hastati, Principes, and Triarii. While the mandatory service system and a large population did give romans a large manpower supply that would reduce the cost of recruiting infantry, it was not to the extent that it would be in post-Marian times, where legionaries could be recruited from all Roman citizens, which included all the former Socii.

-All horse archers have arrow attack values reduced by 1.
Reasoning: The EB stat system, as it is, fails to represent the lower accuracy of horse archers compared with foot archers. Instead of modifying the descr_projectile_new file and making everybody install an additional file, I have decided that it is just simpler to lower the power of horse archers' arrows. This is historical as well, as EB itself describes, as foot archers were able to use bows with more powerful draw, or draw their bows more effectively in general, thus firing off more powerful and penetrating shots.

-Thraikioi Peltastai have the AP ability on their secondary weapon removed.
Reasoning: Thraikioi Peltastai were able to serve as the best of pretty much everything that wasn't a phalanx, cavalryman, or archer, in Hellenic armies because of their combination of excellent skirmishing abilities and high-lethality armour-piercing secondary weapons that could cleave through cataphracts and Carnute Cingetos alike. Also, a rhomphaia wielded in one hand lacks the force and penetrating power of one swung with two hands, thus making it difficult to produce the same sort of devastating results as a Drapanes; yet compared to the Drapanai, the Peltastai had only two less attack! Hence, they have had their AP ability removed, and their secondary has been given +1 attack, so it is comparable to a longsword in effectiveness, which I and others feel is an appropriate level of power. Testing has shown that the Peltastai remain a decently armoured, highly effective unit capable in many roles, but no longer able to just cleave through enemies like their two-handed cousins, the Drapanai.




Shout-Outs and Balloons

-To Vartan, for supporting and encouraging the project from start to completion, well worth two. :balloon2::balloon:

-To Antisocialmunky, for providing valuable and indispensable insight and a game or two to boot - two in one! :balloon2::balloon:

-To Lusitanian Wolf, AGATHODAIMON, LMT_710, stormrage, and The Celtic Viking for playing entertaining, challenging, and insightful testing games. :balloon2::balloon2::balloon2::balloon2::balloon2:

[vartan]

Well done GG2, I'm very proud and very thankful. Intuition tells me many, many good experiences are to come for all MP players.

[Lazy O]

Good job mate, really good job.

[econ21]

I like the sound of these changes - I guess one could use the file for SP games as well as MP ones? Or would there be any issues arising?

BTW, you mentioned an aim of the project being to make phalanxes more vulnerable to missiles, but I can't see a major change listed that addresses that.

[The Celtic Viking]

Well done, mate. :thumbsup:


BTW, you mentioned an aim of the project being to make phalanxes more vulnerable to missiles, but I can't see a major change listed that addresses that.

There are many changes that he didn't post in this thread but are in the documentation. I'll quote the part about phalanxes:


--- PHALANXES ---
Mass of all phalangites reduced by 0.2
Pike lethality increased to 0.2, attack -2
Shields restatted based on actual size (no longer 5)
+2 defense


I like the sound of these changes - I guess one could use the file for SP games as well as MP ones? Or would there be any issues arising?

There would be a problem with unit ownership, as many are removed for the MP version.

[econ21]

There would be a problem with unit ownership, as many are removed for the MP version.

Ok, thanks. If anyone adapts this file for SP use, it would be great if they could share it.

[The Celtic Viking]

Your wish is not my command, but I went ahead and did it anyway. ~:)

You can get it here: http://www.mediafire.com/?tzxtyq9n7y3htv3

Just unrar it to your Rome - Total War folder. (After making backups, of course.)

[econ21]

Your wish is not my command, but I went ahead and did it anyway.

Cheers, mate. :thumbsup:

:bow:

[lmt96]

Cheers! :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

[LusitanianWolf]

I'm not being able do dowload it =S

[The Celtic Viking]

As I was looking through the Epeirote roster and seeing which units are factional, I noticed one discrepancy. Even though Hippeis Thessalonikoi are listed on the website as factional for Epeiros, they're not actually in their roster in game. Is this an EDU error or is it on the side of the factional units list? They're on the list under Epeiros on the official EB website, so unfortunately it seems to me to be the former, but maybe there's a reason for this?

[vartan]

Such an embarrassing mistake on our part not to spot that. Thank you TCV, very much. I have updated the MP EDU installer and the fixed version is now up on the EBO site for y'all to download.

Thanks again!

[LusitanianWolf]

Am I blind or there isnt any download link for the last update?

[gamegeek2]

Wolf, I have directed you to the website for that.

[Lazy O]

www.ebonline.tk

[vartan]

Am I blind or there isnt any download link for the last update?
Keep checking the website. The only things I can vouch for are my site and any threads I run here. The one exception would be the EDU thread I had GG2 create, but not even that now, since discrepancies came up. As you can see on the home page of the site, I posted news updates regarding the changes. At any rate, the last version was uploaded. This means that the very same DL link for the EDU on the site now obtains you the latest version. And that is the version to be used for upcoming tournament series. I hope that clears things up...

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Having trouble dl'ing the 2.0 edu. I download it, it takes me to my program to unzip the file which then informs me that .7z is not a file type which can be used with this program. I'm confused.

[vartan]

Having trouble dl'ing the 2.0 edu. I download it, it takes me to my program to unzip the file which then informs me that .7z is not a file type which can be used with this program. I'm confused.
I'm sorry about that. I will convert all the downloads to simple .zip files over the course of time (ASAP). I'm just accustomed to 7z compression (google 7-zip). In the meantime you can get the installer directly at the following link:
http://www.mediafire.com/?346z3d473yxymwl

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I'm sorry about that. I will convert all the downloads to simple .zip files over the course of time (ASAP). I'm just accustomed to 7z compression (google 7-zip). In the meantime you can get the installer directly at the following link:
http://www.mediafire.com/?346z3d473yxymwl

Thank you good sir. Much appreciated.

[vartan]

gg2 keep notes for what to update for the 2.1 release. We're going to start by proofreading mistakes, such as Ktistai (Dacian Noble Cavalry) having eagles (bonus command) they shouldn't have...do you know of any similar mistakes?

EDIT: gg2, basically what I'm saying is unless we're talking about First Cohorts or something like that (Druids?), only generals should have eagles. This is our only way of incentivizing generals. Having Ktistai and other similar eagled units ruins the whole point of gen-eagles.

[Lazy O]

You could re adjust the horrible pricing of the Baktrian HA, with their mediocre armor, inability to form cantabrian, and not so great ranged attack, they are pretty worthless. Also, Indian Longbows have less range than Persians and Sakae?

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

gg2 keep notes for what to update for the 2.1 release. We're going to start by proofreading mistakes, such as Ktistai (Dacian Noble Cavalry) having eagles (bonus command) they shouldn't have...do you know of any similar mistakes?

EDIT: gg2, basically what I'm saying is unless we're talking about First Cohorts or something like that (Druids?), only generals should have eagles. This is our only way of incentivizing generals. Having Ktistai and other similar eagled units ruins the whole point of gen-eagles.

Its my understanding that Ktistai served in much the same role as Druids did among Celts, hence the eagle.

As far as Indian Longbowmen, I'm unsure of which weapon would have longer range though I would tend to favor a compound bow over a longbow. However, their missile attack should probably be a little higher as their bows were so large they planted them in the ground to fire. I would think the arrows would be of a similar size to the Caucasian Archers in this case. And even if they are not changed, they certainly still have their uses as Eastern Drapanai.

[vartan]

The Baktrian HA is not a lancer. It's a melee medium cav combined with archer ability. Also, it has ridiculous amounts of armour for a horse archer unit. It's one of those more outlandish units, take-it-or-leave-it sort of unit. As for Indian Longbowmen, they probably have 10m less range than Caucasians due to their bow type. Their increased cost is similarly probably due to their melee weapon. I've seen them used cleverly by players as AP melee units, same with Numidian archers.

If the Ktistai indeed were an encouragement to their fellow compatriots, why weren't Hetairoi and Kataphraktoi the same for Hellenes and "Easterners"? Creme de la creme elites would all have that similar psychological role, but you don't see eagles on all such units...what's the correct compromise? I'm not sure.

[gamegeek2]

The Ktistai are priests, that was my reasoning.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

It seems that the Saba general's BG do not possess a command eagle. Just wanted to let you know if you plan on updating.:2thumbsup:

[lmt96]

It seems that the Saba general's BG do not possess a command eagle. Just wanted to let you know if you plan on updating.:2thumbsup:
Stormrage would be angry with this :laugh4::laugh4:

[Aulus Caecina Severus]

I played many time with this EDU and I found some thing that seems me wrong.
First is the naked fanatics invulnerability by missiles (they died only after the 3rd or 4th volley of arrows, or javelins).
Second is the difference between lusitani and romans: take a look, that lusitani seems to be an overpowered romani (falcata is too better than gladius and solifera are too better than pilum).
Third the excessive weakening of hastati make them absolutely unuseful as heavy infantry (lower armour, lower morale, unuseful increase of size from 40 to 50, plus they still carry the same malus in woods as others heavy inf).

Anyway some others things are better than EDU1.2, like cav and eastern infantry.
Please, take care about my 3 suggestions ;-)

[antisocialmunky]

Lusotani are a little ridiculous yes.

[Burebista]

I played many time with this EDU and I found some thing that seems me wrong.
First is the naked fanatics invulnerability by missiles (they died only after the 3rd or 4th volley of arrows, or javelins).
Second is the difference between lusitani and romans: take a look, that lusitani seems to be an overpowered romani (falcata is too better than gladius and solifera are too better than pilum).


Gaesatae have 2 hp thus the late deaths.

As far as falcatas are involved , you should see the general perspective. What ar the players playing? Mostly phalanxes , with 2 romans and 1 Carthage .
OP ? dont think so as i am the only one playing them.
Romans have higher manpower , for less cost , which ultimately is why romans are better than lusitani.

[Lazy O]

Lusitani do not have the armor to withstand Pila, legions do, and I dont think Hastati are meant to be Heavy infantry at the cost of 1100 or 1200 -.-

[vartan]

I played many time with this EDU and I found some thing that seems me wrong.
First is the naked fanatics invulnerability by missiles (they died only after the 3rd or 4th volley of arrows, or javelins).
Second is the difference between lusitani and romans: take a look, that lusitani seems to be an overpowered romani (falcata is too better than gladius and solifera are too better than pilum).
Third the excessive weakening of hastati make them absolutely unuseful as heavy infantry (lower armour, lower morale, unuseful increase of size from 40 to 50, plus they still carry the same malus in woods as others heavy inf).

Anyway some others things are better than EDU1.2, like cav and eastern infantry.
Please, take care about my 3 suggestions ;-)
I recommend gg2 respond to these suggestions as well. They're really great concerns, actually. Here's my take, and I'm no expert...



For the naked units...if the units in question have 2HP, then they die late simply due to their extra hitpoint. This is to be expected, and very, very normal.
Regarding the Luso vs Romani, if the weapons in question were better, then they were better. Or had different purposes. I'm not sure. But if that is the case, then that is why they are represented as better in the EDU's values. No more, no less (i.e., no artificial idea of making one faction better for its own sake).
And as for light infantry such as the Hastati, they should cost as much as they are powerful, and so the EDU was adapted to make cost and performance relatively parallel. Cheaper unit? Probably not as good as a more costly unit, such as a heavier Principes.

[Lazy O]

But but, lusotana do not have a 100 men excellent morale monster for a dirt cheap price ;P

[Kival]

And almost all of their units lack the proper amount of armour. They die very quickly through missile fire.

[Aulus Caecina Severus]

Lusitani do not have the armor to withstand Pila, legions do, and I dont think Hastati are meant to be Heavy infantry at the cost of 1100 or 1200 -.-

Sorry, but each Lusitani heavy infantry wear the same armour as legionary, they died under the missiles due to their lower shield value (3 instead of 4).
And Hastati ARE heavy infantry. If they aren't why they take the same field malus as others heavy infantry.
Also the historical deployment of hastati is in only one way: heavy infantry. Then they can not stand against others infantry cause they are really weak in EDU 2.0.

About Lusitani light infantry; they are almost useful as that role because of their great field bonus (especially in woods) and fast moving.
How can you say again that hastati should work as light infantry? They are unuseful.

So make hastati less cheap, but please, make them quite useful.

[vartan]

About Lusitani light infantry; they are almost useful as that role because of their great field bonus (especially in woods) and fast moving.
What woods? I don't see people playing in the forest online.

GG2 really has to respond as he's in best position to do so.

[gamegeek2]

The Lusitani light infantry die to missile fire, as has been mentioned already. Shoot them with some Cretans. And as vartan mentioned, nobody plays in the woods online.

Look, the Lusotanaan got better than before because previously they were one of the worst factions. Now they're better, as they got "barbarian" bonuses (which they didn't have before - I don't understand that, are western Iberians less "barbarous" than Gauls?).

I have had the opposite complaint about Hastati - that they died too slowly. So I cut their morale to 11. They're still 11 attack/0.15 leth/20 defense, with a good shield and armour piercing javelins, and have 100 men. They also get paired with Principes and Triarii, very cost-effective heavy infantry as well. What's the problem?

You do remember that pre-Marians were so overpowered before this EDU that they had to have a monetary penalty imposed upon them, right?

Soliferra are only a bit better than pila and are more expensive. Besides, a soliferrum is called a "soli-ferrum" meaning "only iron" - you can see why that would be both more expensive and more damaging than a pilum. Also many Lusitanian units have boosts to their javelin skill, making them more expensive but better with javelins.

[Lazy O]

I still do not see the viability of Lusotann..... Even with your extremely annoying skirmisher spam gg2, I just dont think its competetive. Morale breakers are the death of these guys, along with any pointed object and marginally competetive cavalry. (That saba battle does not count :D)

[gamegeek2]

Lazy, I beat an army with 8 archers, designed to crush my strategy...

[antisocialmunky]

The Lusitani light infantry die to missile fire, as has been mentioned already. Shoot them with some Cretans. And as vartan mentioned, nobody plays in the woods online.

Look, the Lusotanaan got better than before because previously they were one of the worst factions. Now they're better, as they got "barbarian" bonuses (which they didn't have before - I don't understand that, are western Iberians less "barbarous" than Gauls?).

I have had the opposite complaint about Hastati - that they died too slowly. So I cut their morale to 11. They're still 11 attack/0.15 leth/20 defense, with a good shield and armour piercing javelins, and have 100 men. They also get paired with Principes and Triarii, very cost-effective heavy infantry as well. What's the problem?

You do remember that pre-Marians were so overpowered before this EDU that they had to have a monetary penalty imposed upon them, right?

Soliferra are only a bit better than pila and are more expensive. Besides, a soliferrum is called a "soli-ferrum" meaning "only iron" - you can see why that would be both more expensive and more damaging than a pilum. Also many Lusitanian units have boosts to their javelin skill, making them more expensive but better with javelins.

Roman units were too cheap pre-marian, not too powerful. :p

Also, I'd like to ask for sized 100 Hoplitae Haploi and Ekdromoi. Those units have no use and are too similar to other units. It would be nice also if Greece gets some 'padd' units to deal with catas.

[Lazy O]

You still got done by the gauls didnt you?? :D The one which was not designed to crush you actually worked :D

[vartan]

I can't believe I missed this. Lower pre-Marian Roman infantry prices are for SP use. They weren't modified for MP. Duh! GG2 add this to your notes: Increase prices and stats of pre-Marians.

[gamegeek2]

Whoops, that's a big one to miss...

[The Celtic Viking]

I can't believe I missed this. Lower pre-Marian Roman infantry prices are for SP use. They weren't modified for MP. Duh! GG2 add this to your notes: Increase prices and stats of pre-Marians.

It seems my whining has no affect on you. -.-

[vartan]

It seems my whining has no affect on you. -.-
Bahahaha. "STOP WHINING" - Arnold Sch...something. :laugh4:

Be more specific ;)

[The Celtic Viking]

I've kind of, uh... pointed this out to you and others here and on hamachi a few times. It's even in the thread for feedback that GG2 created for this edu. It's like you haven't even listened to me since that night in Las Vegas. :sad:

[gamegeek2]

Well then, we ought to have that changed for later.

[vartan]

I've kind of, uh... pointed this out to you and others here and on hamachi a few times. It's even in the thread for feedback that GG2 created for this edu. It's like you haven't even listened to me since that night in Las Vegas. :sad:
You mean this very thread? lol...by 'pointed this out' do you mean the issue with under-powered pre-Marians? You probably did point that out. But I forget what I had for lunch yesterday, so don't be surprised at me. I listen. What happens or doesn't happen in my brain after I listen, I don't know.

[The Celtic Viking]

You mean this very thread? lol...by 'pointed this out' do you mean the issue with under-powered pre-Marians? You probably did point that out. But I forget what I had for lunch yesterday, so don't be surprised at me. I listen. What happens or doesn't happen in my brain after I listen, I don't know.

Now you're just trying to get under my skin. No worries, comrade. You'll get to do that later.


Well then, we ought to have that changed for later.

Glad to hear it. ~:)

[Lazy O]

[22:03:15]
i want
[22:03:19]
price reconsideration
[22:03:33]
on baktrian lights, and indian spearmen,saka spearmen
[22:03:48]
being seemingly useless units
[22:04:03]
ima just post this convo

[vartan]

What PsychO LazyO is trying to say is that there are various light units (his bias lies in those regional to his faction of choice) that seem to be useless. What he fails to understand is that those very same light units turn out to be crucial in LMGs (Low Money Games for the clueless). In a LMG, mass may prove more crucial than in a HMG, and so you're bound to see more lower quality units. Don't expect to see many of these lights online unless they're missile or minor bulk support.

[Lazy O]

What PsychO is REALLY trying to say is that above mentioned units are useless crap and you can get other things for the same things and I would like to see their stats are restructured or they be made cheaper.

[vartan]

What PsychO is REALLY trying to say is that above mentioned units are useless crap and you can get other things for the same things and I would like to see their stats are restructured or they be made cheaper.
Valid concern. Why didn't you just do that instead of paste an unreadable block of text?

[antisocialmunky]

Um, 240 spear spam is an anti-cav thing. They are a valid counter to cata due to their massive sizes. They are fine, I think. However, it would be nice if every unit had a purpose. I would want to modify units so everyone is useful. EB team spent a lot of time on the units and I rather see everything be somewhat feasible to field with the right army. The main candidates in my eyes are some of the smaller Gallic sword units, some of the Luso skirms, and some of the Greek Levy units (And maybe Rhodians). Mainly they are units that have several more expensive alternatives that are straight better or make the unit redundant.

[vartan]

That's why we had 2.0 to begin with, to make as many units useful as possible, hence the lethality alterations.

[Lazy O]

Well the aforementioned units do not seem useful to me. In a Saka army, where you are guaranteed cavalry supremacy, why get 100 man units which are more expensive AND die like flies when you can get exceelent line holders which are cheaper? Thats why I am asking to reprice them according to their Shitty abilities so I have a levy unit worth bragging about :D

[vartan]

I knew I should have done a placeholder #2 post here. Anyway, ongoing proposal list for EDU 2.1 changes is linked below. I have compiled a list of suggestions from various sources. Will update it as necessary. Making this public so that people can refer to certain proposals and argue for or against them (or any variation of them).

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B8pgdrJqBnJBN2ZjNDQyYWItMDdkOS00MGU5LWE4ODMtYWU5Njk3ZmNiYjZl&hl=en_US

[Kival]

As far as I remember I never wrote such a proposal about phalangites. I assume you mixed me up here with someone else.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

As far as I remember I never wrote such a proposal about phalangites. I assume you mixed me up here with someone else.

You did it in your sleep.:clown:

Nah that was me.

[-Stormrage-]

Since were complaining here, i better pitch in :

Slingers dont do **** Against heavy armored units. I have just played a battle , where i had 4 maybe 5 slingers on the right (No- shield) side of My enemies front line. His Front line of Gallic soldiers ran forward to attack my line , and they were in bulk so i started pelting their backs with my slings. They pelted and pelted until they could pelt no more . and i can safely say Slingers dont do **** against the type of unit it was made to counter Armor, there is a reason why they are AP ( Anti - Armour ) . And They dont kill armored units , im talking from the sides and back. In the beggining of the battle 4 of my slings were pelting one unit of gallic something from the side and after a couple of volleys not one died. I requesst that Slingers attack be increased so atleast some of them die on the first volley when 4 slings are targeting one unit !!!!!!! Seriously Slings in EB have 1 or maybe 2 attack . I repeat my motto Slings Dont do **** (yet) please fix this . watch this pay close attention to the slingers http://www.mediafire.com/?qcaix5932qema95

[Kival]

Slingers are deadly against armoured units, not against units with high shield values. And you need to give them one experience point, else they do not do much. Slingers are really good against enemy heavy cavalry, i don't see a problem here.

[-Stormrage-]

First of all I apolagize i failed to mention that the slingers i used WERE one chevron. The shield value Is Insignificant in this matter , becuase as i said a couple of times before i was shooting from the right side and from the backs of the units, so the shield value isnt counted. The Right side of a unit is the side with NO shield. I repeat 4 units of slings attacking one armoured unit from the side and not one casualty after the first or second volley! is that "deadly against armoured unints" ?

[Kival]

I will have a look at your replay, but my experience differ from yours.

[vartan]

Sorry Robin I will fix that typo. I don't know what I was thinking.

Storm, you're not supposed to hit the side with no shield, rather hit the side with shield. The engine is broken and horribly misprogrammed in more than only this regard.

[-Stormrage-]

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now i know why I,ve been Doing so badly lately.

[Kival]

Storm, you're not supposed to hit the side with no shield, rather hit the side with shield. The engine is broken and horribly misprogrammed in more than only this regard.

Really? Is this true for both missile units and melee?

[vartan]

Really? Is this true for both missile units and melee?
If I remember correctly, yes. I would view Aradan and phalanx_man's guides at the TWC for verification.

Updated proposals (new listing in EDU and Factional sections; corrected typo).
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B8pgdrJqBnJBNGNjMTUwODktNDQ1MS00Nzg2LThjYmMtODViZWRlMWU0NzQ0&hl=en_US

[Kival]

First of all I apolagize i failed to mention that the slingers i used WERE one chevron. The shield value Is Insignificant in this matter , becuase as i said a couple of times before i was shooting from the right side and from the backs of the units, so the shield value isnt counted. The Right side of a unit is the side with NO shield. I repeat 4 units of slings attacking one armoured unit from the side and not one casualty after the first or second volley! is that "deadly against armoured unints" ?

I've viewed the replay and connot really see the problem. You reduced one unit of neitos from 80 to 55 with a few volley of your 4 slinger units. Your first attacks were against your enemies slingers but later when you attacked the neitos and had a free path you killed a lot of them. Not in the first two volley but the later ones were very effective. How deadly do you want slingers to be? Archers have an attack of 3-5/6. Slingers should not have an attack as high as archers, so you could rise the attack value to perhaps 2 and 3 for the normal slingers but higher would be inapproriate. Most of them are not trained troops and they are so cheap i would not agree to increase their attack. And if you increase their attack it should be only increased by one.

[gamegeek2]

The system is bugged, it was discovered that shield value applies from the right side but mostly not from the left. It makes no sense and was probably a programming error on the part of CA, likely due to a confusion of attacker vs defender perspective.

My preferred solution (to slingers) would be to reduce sling accuracy and raise sling attack somewhat. That would require editing the projectile file, though.

Kival your proposal for Boii as a factional makes no sense. The Boii domains are hundreds of miles from anything the Aedui or Arverni ever controlled. The Bataroas are plenty powerful.

[vartan]

Kival your proposal for Boii as a factional makes no sense. The Boii domains are hundreds of miles from anything the Aedui or Arverni ever controlled. The Bataroas are plenty powerful.
Noricum was pretty far from Aedui/Arverni domains as well. Yet they are factional. The Kluddacorii are within Aedui/Arverni domains, yet they aren't factional. Perhaps the EB site was a good place to start, but clearly we haven't considered updating the factional lists or reviewing them to any significant extent.

[antisocialmunky]

I would make them do more damage but shoot slower. You can load and fire arrows pretty fast since everything is linear but loading a stone into the pouch and getting slings up to speed would take some time.

[Kival]

Kival your proposal for Boii as a factional makes no sense. The Boii domains are hundreds of miles from anything the Aedui or Arverni ever controlled. The Bataroas are plenty powerful.

If it is about aedui-domains you could not inculde noricum spearmen, too. And celtic axemen were also not used anymore in the region of modern french. Belgae are not part of the Aedui and centrals of boiis in northern italy (not represented in eb and perhaps a few decades earlier) and east of the alps are not really more away from the aedui than norricum.

The problem is if you watch averni and aedui just as averni and aedui you'd need to shorten their factional list drastically.Therefor I would propose a view of aedui and averni as mainland celtic in core and give them a possibility to have more diverse armies. Sure, botraos are great but they are also very different from the boii swordsmen. The swordsmen have more armor, which is somewhat useful in some situations. I would also give them the possibility to use galatian units (which is not possible?) and Lugii, Galathraikes, Cordinau Orca at least as mercenaries. I think it would make to much work to include them all but I would not exclude eastern celtic units from the roster.

The problem is that there is no concept in the factional unit composition of the two celtic factions from the mainland. I will accept a concept not including the boii but I'd like to see any concept at all here.

[vartan]

There do seem to be many incoherencies like that. As I said, we need to reconsider our approach. I don't really know what the basis was for the factional unit lists on the EB site, but they tended to include units both within and without the factions' domains.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Vartan is it even possible to give Median Medium Cav to Hayasdan? They already have their own version of the medium cavalry in addition to the generic Medium Eastern Cavalry which is classified as a mercenary unit. I was under the impression that a faction could only have two units which shared the same model (one being labeled a merc unit) and AFAIK they cannot recruit Medians in the campaign.

[Lazy O]

What is the problem with slingers? I can use them to murder HA or general units alike, they are sniper squads with MG 42's and a laser guidance system.

[vartan]

Vartan is it even possible to give Median Medium Cav to Hayasdan? They already have their own version of the medium cavalry in addition to the generic Medium Eastern Cavalry which is classified as a mercenary unit. I was under the impression that a faction could only have two units which shared the same model (one being labeled a merc unit) and AFAIK they cannot recruit Medians in the campaign.
I don't know, to be honest. Frankly, I would just forget Medians as the Hai. They don't go together. As you said, the Hai have their own medium cav in addition to the generic eastern one which has the same overhand spear and axe.

[Aulus Caecina Severus]

What is the problem with slingers? I can use them to murder HA or general units alike, they are sniper squads with MG 42's and a laser guidance system.

:laugh4: Yes, sometimes they seem to be clearly better than every archer units. They kill too easy the armoured units.

[vartan]

:laugh4: Yes, sometimes they seem to be clearly better than every archer units. They kill too easy the armoured units.
That's because that was their purpose, what they were meant to fulfill...

[Kival]

If you're improving the elites, you should consider to improve Cordinau Orca accordingly to the solduros. At least in their unit description they are described as comparable with the solduros. And I'm not exactly sure, what to think about


They are famous for their use of sheering curved swords that can open wide gashes on an opponent, particularly when used by the fearsome Carduci tribe, who are most famous for them

They have less lethality than longwords. If that is apropriate why were they famous for opening "wide gashes on an oponnent"? It sounds as if they were stronger than longswords (which would be normal for gauls?) in some way but I'm not exactly sure, perhaps it's just a language problem.

My second point is, that it makes no sense that cretan archers are factional for the ptolies but they get the mercenary version as unit?

[antisocialmunky]

Yes they should be better because they are long sword armed, chain mail clad, giant dolphins with eye spots.

[gamegeek2]

If you're improving the elites, you should consider to improve Cordinau Orca accordingly to the solduros. At least in their unit description they are described as comparable with the solduros. And I'm not exactly sure, what to think about



They have less lethality than longwords. If that is apropriate why were they famous for opening "wide gashes on an oponnent"? It sounds as if they were stronger than longswords (which would be normal for gauls?) in some way but I'm not exactly sure, perhaps it's just a language problem.

My second point is, that it makes no scence that cretan archers are factional for the ptolies but they get the mercenary version as unit?

By the same token the Seleucids should get them as factionals as well...I don't think either should get them, and neither should Makedonia.

I may just stat it as a longsword. As it is, it's +2 atk and .175 lethality. The reasoning behind this is that the single-edged swords produced in Central Europe by the Germanics and some celts costed a fair bit less to make, but were typically shorter than longswords and overall somewhat less impressive. Therefore they are much cheaper, but only a little bit less effective in melee. I need to apply this to the Korodrougos and I haven't. That was my bad.

If you want the Cordinau Orca's swords to be better, expect a price increase as well.

[Kival]

Yes they should be better because they are long sword armed, chain mail clad, giant dolphins with eye spots.

I do not get it. Is that sarcasm?


By the same token the Seleucids should get them as factionals as well...I don't think either should get them, and neither should Makedonia.

I did not say, they should be factional; in fact they *are listed as factional" for the ptolies but they get the mercenary unit version of them. That does not make sense. It's okay for me to say, they're not factional but than they should not be in the list and if they are factional they should get the proper unit version. It's not very important (are their any stat differences?) and I'm really looking forward to your new version!


I may just stat it as a longsword. As it is, it's +2 atk and .175 lethality.

That's a possibility. The Hypaspistai use the same stats, too, although I do not believe that they really used longswords. On the other hand it's perhaps better to let it stay "+2 atk and .175 lethality" as it's a better representation of the difference between their swords and the longsword. I'm not sure.

EDIT: Now you have edited your post and I need to change my anwser, too. :damnmate: Your reasoning makes sense for me but I'm not a historian so I don't know if it is correct. I just wondered about the stats (originally 1.2!) which did not really correspond to the unit description.


If you want the Cordinau Orca's swords to be better, expect a price increase as well.

I've never used them until now, as Aedui cannot use them at all (until now). I just stumbled over it.

[vartan]

This is why I hate edits. I don't mind adding to the post count, though. Yes, Cretans are slightly higher defense if mercenary. Perhaps they should be...mercs for whoever is within reach of them, and factional only for KH, I think.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Could the Baktrians gain access to Subeshi archers? They are available to recruit in two of the neighboring provinces to Baktria and are also a redundant unit, being only available to the Saka yet being the exact same as Saka archers. Giving them to Baktria might actually find a use for them.

[Lazy O]

We the Saka beg to disagree, while we do indeed neighbor you stinky greeks, our archers are simple better, and are what make us unique, if the geeky voice in the sky begs to differ, he should make them mercenaries for the Stinky greeks.

[antisocialmunky]

I think Ptoly gets factional Merc Cretans due to the geopolitics of 272 with their support of the southern Greeks. I don't think its that big of an issue ans Syrian archers fill a similar role and are less likely to get nerf batted due to being particularly annoying.

[vartan]

Could the Baktrians gain access to Subeshi archers? They are available to recruit in two of the neighboring provinces to Baktria and are also a redundant unit, being only available to the Saka yet being the exact same as Saka archers. Giving them to Baktria might actually find a use for them.
Thanks for mentioning that. I didn't spot that one myself. We're looking at the new posts here for suggestions so keep them coming.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Thanks for mentioning that. I didn't spot that one myself. We're looking at the new posts here for suggestions so keep them coming.

Maybe both the Eastern Light and Medium Cav's for Pontus as factionals. I don't see them listed on the site.

I also noticed that Hetairoi Aspidophoroi are listed as heavy cav only for the Ptolemaoi on the site. For all other factions they are not considered heavy cav.

[antisocialmunky]

Cap HA arrows at 35.

[gamegeek2]

Giving Baktria Subeshi archers would be entirely illogical, unless at some point Baktria controlled the Tarim basin.

[-Stormrage-]

Ok.lets take this conversation in a completely different direction. I want Mercs to be taken completely out of EB MP. I cant put it any simpler then this, so i hope you understand. My Reasoning is as follows: Without Mercs Factions will have more Differentiation and Each faction will be Unique. Right now Factions are Quite Similar. Furthermore , When you face your opponent you want to have units Unique to you, The problem is their is no ownership for the factions. I mean WHY THE **** do Romans have Gallic Troops, YOU ARE PICKING ROME its completely absurd for you to see Gallic Soldiers in your roster, what is this a 2-in-1 deal . Even more Furthermore(lol), The Description of each faction is wrong when mercs are used. for example: A Faction like saka might be described as having superior Cavalry and Weak Infantry, but when you see Saka's Roster you see many Infantry ,Why? i thought they were Weak in the Infantry section they shouldnt have many infantry. Without Mercs Factions would be more uniwue, for example the Faction that has those Thracian Skirmishers as Factionals , should be the only faction with thracian Skirmishers hence being unique to having the best skirmishers. but Now many factions can get Thracian Skirmishers so its no big deal. in other words if each faction had its own factionals all to itself , Factions wil have a clearer border between them, for example bosphorans the best archers in the game should only be in Pontus's faction, Thus when people pick pontus they now that they can pick the best archers and no one else can it makes pontus special for having best archers. Gallic factions would have units all to themselves rome. Those Thracians should only be available to macedon , that will make them distinguished maong the other factions as having superior skirmishers.this conludes my case.

Edit: examples
1)romasn should be weak in archers but in game they have cretans,why? that completely takes away the advantage KH had over ROME. Pontus has Bosphorans as their fationals that is their advantage good archers, but you took away their advantage so when KH fights agaisnt pontus both have BOsphorans in their rosters and both have the ability to get bosphoransm,so that inturn removes the advantage pontus had over KH.

[vartan]

Someone's been picking up the wrong books lately, lol. Nice use of asterisks, though, highly commendable.

[-Stormrage-]

Hey, ever thought of increasing javelin damage ( maybe to 16) cuz skirmishers arent doing much damage agasint pantadormoi phalanx, i just came back from watching a rpelay, skirmisher unit was attacking a phalanx from the sides and it was getting 1 -2 kills each volley, thats not worht investing in, and javelins should kill more especially since they are being thrown into a compact area of units, its not like they were in loose formation they were close togethr, and 1-2 kills a volley is pathetic. http://download1346.mediafire.com/iakwvjcqabbg/e23cj2w2a2ij3bk/tourneyvs.Lazyo.rpy

EDIT: some volleys even resulted in 0 kills

[The Celtic Viking]

The sphendonetai cost exactly the same as shuban-i fradakhshana do and their stats are exactly the same, except that the sphendos have -1 ranged attack. I do remember that this was a change you made for 2.0, so am I right in assuming that you forgot to lower their cost accordingly, or was this intentional?

Edit: also, the documentation for 2.0 says that all archers have a minimum of 25 arrows, but toxotai only have 15.

[Kival]

I somewhat completey disagree to stormrage. I can understand to question some specific mercenary units but it's nonsense to e.g. strip the romans from allied units. They did have gallic and other mercenary units and used them. It's the advantage of the KH that they have a diverse roster of units from all over the mediterranean I would rather give them more of this units as factional (or raise their mercenary limit similar to quart-hadast) than force them not to use any of them.

Thracian Skirmishers were well know for their fame and were used by a lot of armies in the surrounding areas. Why should we neglect them to pontos, getai etc.? Saka had weak infantry in their homeland but they expanded to India, you forgot? I want to have the possibility to use a historical influenced army not to artificially be forced to use only some core factional units and be done with it then. I strongly disagree to the proposal, the factions are diverse, their is no need to change something here. The proposal would just reduce the possibilies of diverse armies for one faction which is something I really appreciate the way it is.

PS: And some factions would be screwed up in some match ups more than they are now if they had no chance to use their mercenaries.

[vartan]

Storm your idea would be completely irrelevant if I did away with the factional vs merc concept as it applies to MP. Sure, it has its roots in the SP factional vs regional MICs, but there's nothing to stop us playing by saying "you can use anybody on your MP roster". The whole point of the factional/merc system for MP is so that there is more VARIATION. If we did away with mercs, we'd be doing away with possibilities.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Giving Baktria Subeshi archers would be entirely illogical, unless at some point Baktria controlled the Tarim basin.

This is the recruitment area of Subeshi archers. http://europabarbarorum.heimstatt.net/index.php?mp=unitmap&unit=steppe%20missile%20subeshi&text=&ownership=any&class=any&category=any

Areas like Dayaun were definitely within either the borders of Baktria or at least their sphere of influence. The EB team allowed Subeshi's to be recruited there and I would tend to believe that there is some reason for that. That being said, I am no expert on the matter.

[vartan]

Areas like Dayaun were definitely within either the borders of Baktria or at least their sphere of influence. The EB team allowed Subeshi's to be recruited there and I would tend to believe that there is some reason for that. That being said, I am no expert on the matter.
Exactly. This is why I had Alans as factional for Saka, even if they're not of the same 'tribe' or 'nation'. But pretty soon they'll be regionals for both Sauro and Saka, the two who would probably be recruiting them from their rosters, if I'm not mistaken.

[Lazy O]

Carthaginian Libyan Heavy Spearmen need more stamina. They are not even good stamina despite supposedly being a thorakitai ish assault unit.

EDU name is Mesoorianim Leebim

[-Stormrage-]

are subeshi archers even good ?

and skirmishers missile attack should be increased significantly, i mean skirmishers have the same missile damage as arrows. correct me if im wrong but i thought javelins were pretty dangerous mass murderers. i beleive skirmisher missile attack should be buffed to maybe 10 missile damage. what do you guys think?

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Carthaginian Libyan Heavy Spearmen need more stamina. They are not even good stamina despite supposedly being a thorakitai ish assault unit.

EDU name is Mesoorianim Leebim

Thorakitai don't have good stamina either. Libyan Heavy Spears are already only slightly worse than Thorakitai though costing significantly less. Giving them good stamina would not be good imo.

And as far as Subeshi's go, they have slightly less range than Saka foot archers but have 1 point more armor and slightly better discipline. They both cost the same, around 900, which is slightly more expensive than most unarmored archers but their range allows you to win most duels with similar type units.

[Lazy O]

Thorkies also getting it

[vartan]

Kind of like EB, huh, where every damned unit has a hardy hardy? lol, what a pickle ^_^

Hardy's a tricky one. Guess it means you can use your unit more carelessly, not being forced to preserve it until the right moment to strike/engage.

[Lazy O]

Here is another one:

Give Macedon a discount on phalangites so they can get the better more armoured phalangites (im talking reformed ones) at a price similiar to pezhetaroi so Makedonia are buffed since they do not have the cataphracts other successor factions do.

[-Stormrage-]

Increase Javelin Damage to atleast 10. What say you!

[Lazy O]

That would make spear armed skirmisher overpowered with their current price, with a price hike, they would not be as cost effective for the role of filler units.

[antisocialmunky]

The higher morale ones, yes. Its kinda weird. More javelins would overpower skirms against lighter armored units so that's bad too. The more attack, and the high end skirms become extremely good (like the AP Thracian ones were).

Is there any way to increase their run speed/stamina? They don't actually outrun anything right now.

[-Stormrage-]

i suggested increasing javbelin damage, becuase skirmishers are not gettign any kills , even when you target a phalanx formation they get 0-1 kills , and phalanxes are supposed to have like 2 shield, so why are skirmishers not getting kills ?

im not talking about killing light untis im talking about killing heavies. maybe u can increase lethality or something . and if we increase javelin damage only the soul skirmishers will get the boost , in other words only the units that are pure skirmishers aka only for skirmishing, because thats what they do thats their proffesiion they should be better at it.

[vartan]

I believe there are hidden factors at play here that are particular to the phalanx-mode capable units that result in this issue you depict with javelins being near-useless against phalanx-mode capable units.

[Kival]

The only thing which would help only against heavy armoured enemies is obviously the ap-trait but it should stay for pilums and similar weapons only.

[antisocialmunky]

Actually, running speed would be nice so you can actually legitimately deal with cav with light infantry.

[-Stormrage-]

no , im sure that increasing javelin damage or giving it AP , will solve the problem make javelin damage 11, and you will see

[antisocialmunky]

If you do that, then Peltastai will be able to spam all its javelin and then beat other infantry. I think they actually have decent javelins. I can see Celtic units becoming OP if you raised all their damage enough that they can hurt phalanx or Thureophoroi type infantry. Eastern Axe/Jav infantry will also be able to tear apart most celtic or mediterranian infantry.

[-Stormrage-]

Even with 11 attack damage they will not be able to get more then 3-4 kills when attacking a phalanx. they will not be OP they wont get crazy kills they will get 4 kills a vollye hopefully. I repeat with 11 attack for javelins they wont be OP. " I think they actually have decent javelins"-antisocialmunkey , are u kiddin me man , are we playing the same game here!? Javelins barely get one kill a volley. GG2 try Testing this ,try giving them AP or 11 attack , The ideal skirmisher would be one that gets 2-4 kills from the front. When javelins are hurled into a compact phalanx formation and dont get any kills thats just wrong, dont tell me they are deflected their sheild value is 2 . Please skirmishers are UNDERPOWERED right now, no they are not decent , make them decent. Those 2 hitpoint naked dudes are the ones which are overpowered, but thats a different topic.

Edit : try giving the Javs the AP trait or something . (good idea Kival)

[antisocialmunky]

So you're saying that you want to make Javelins over powered againt everything but phalanx?

[Lazy O]

Learn to use them before you change them, they are fine already.

[-Stormrage-]

Lazyo,Munky go do a test run and you'll see what im talking about. What is the problem if Someone just plays around with the stats and tests them? GO do Tests so you accually have something to back up your words.

[antisocialmunky]

Phalanx are wacky, don't even both missiling them because they get a crazy bonus from the front. Skirms are amazing against Germans, Celts, Luso, and other lightly armored units. No one is going to OP skirms against everything just to fix phalanx.

[-Stormrage-]

i think the best thing we can do on this matter is to give javs the AP trait so that they can get some kills on phalanx and leave their attack value as is, too lessen OP on lighter units. what do you think GG2

[vartan]

I think you're off by a mile storm. I recommend all javelins get over nine thousand attack and two AP traits, one for their armor piercing javelins, and one for their armor piercing fists.

[antisocialmunky]

Brvtvs Bannivs would be proud